Did you have logs at MIT? I competed at MIT and got 8th with a time of 1:05 and completed logs. Is there really a 20 place gap for 7 seconds?_deltaV wrote:Just to give some perspective, teams were breaking 2:30 at Cornell. At MIT, one team in the time block before me broke something like 2:30 and another team seemed really excited about that. My time of :58 didn't break the top 30 and 1:17 from our B team didn't break the top 20. I think at Nationals this year we're going to see at least one or two teams breaking 3:45. IMHO, at this point 2:00 is the minimum time needed to stay competitive when teams are breaking 2:30 this early in the season
Helicopters C
-
- Member
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2017 3:56 pm
- Division: C
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Helicopters C
-
- Exalted Member
- Posts: 383
- Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:10 am
- Division: C
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Helicopters C
Weird, we got 9th with around 1:35 with logs no bonus.Bluejet1179 wrote:Did you have logs at MIT? I competed at MIT and got 8th with a time of 1:05 and completed logs. Is there really a 20 place gap for 7 seconds?_deltaV wrote:Just to give some perspective, teams were breaking 2:30 at Cornell. At MIT, one team in the time block before me broke something like 2:30 and another team seemed really excited about that. My time of :58 didn't break the top 30 and 1:17 from our B team didn't break the top 20. I think at Nationals this year we're going to see at least one or two teams breaking 3:45. IMHO, at this point 2:00 is the minimum time needed to stay competitive when teams are breaking 2:30 this early in the season
Innovation =/= success
-
- Member
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2016 8:47 am
- Division: C
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Helicopters C
Was at a competition this past weekend. First place was recorded as 230 seconds, second place as 142. Not sure if first was a mistake or an incredible flight. Don't know about bonus on either one.
-
- Member
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 2:34 pm
- Division: C
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Helicopters C
Could I ask which competition this was? And I agree with P2P, 2:30 seems much more likely than 230 seconds.RJohnson wrote:Was at a competition this past weekend. First place was recorded as 230 seconds, second place as 142. Not sure if first was a mistake or an incredible flight. Don't know about bonus on either one.
2015: R | S Bridge: 1 | 8 AirTraj: 5 | 26 WS: 12 | 9 Scrambler: 6 | 17 DP: 7 | X 2016: Bridge: 2 | 15 AirTraj: 2 | 6 WS: 3 | 11 DP: 4 | 15 GeoMap: 4 | 25 2017: Heli: 1 | 1 Hover: 1 | 4 Towers: 2 | 15 DP: 1 | 6 Wind: 2 | 8
R | S
Heli:
Hover:
Towers:
DP:
Eco:
MV:[/b]
-
- Member
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2015 5:44 pm
- Division: Grad
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Helicopters C
What models were used by the winning teams at MIT and Cornell? Freedom Flight without modification? Modified FFM? Or the conventional X rotor design? Just curious.Bazinga+ wrote:Weird, we got 9th with around 1:35 with logs no bonus.Bluejet1179 wrote:Did you have logs at MIT? I competed at MIT and got 8th with a time of 1:05 and completed logs. Is there really a 20 place gap for 7 seconds?_deltaV wrote:Just to give some perspective, teams were breaking 2:30 at Cornell. At MIT, one team in the time block before me broke something like 2:30 and another team seemed really excited about that. My time of :58 didn't break the top 30 and 1:17 from our B team didn't break the top 20. I think at Nationals this year we're going to see at least one or two teams breaking 3:45. IMHO, at this point 2:00 is the minimum time needed to stay competitive when teams are breaking 2:30 this early in the season
"I am among those who think that science has great beauty. A scientist in his laboratory is not only a technician: he is also a child placed before natural phenomena which impress him like a fairy tale." - Marie Curie
Enloe '19 || UNC Chapel Hill '23
See resources I helped create here!
Enloe '19 || UNC Chapel Hill '23
See resources I helped create here!
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 1:02 pm
- Division: C
- State: TX
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Helicopters C
If there is a time of 230, theres gotta be some dude breaking the bank to hire a team of engineers. And even then, I'm not sure they can achieve that due to limitations of the rubber itself.
-
- Member
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:24 pm
- State: DC
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Helicopters C
Cornell isn't a good metric for winning times now- we achieved fourth place with a 4 am build session off a partial kit using wooden rotors. Most teams are using a modified FFM kit or traditional FFM kit. I believe 2:30 is a reasonable time- if anything some teams are shooting for 2:45 (after bonus calculation). However I think that is impossible and 2:30-2:35 will be a national winning/placing time. I only know of one team not using FFM kit and achieving sub 2 minute times.
Fermilicious
-
- Exalted Member
- Posts: 383
- Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:10 am
- Division: C
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Helicopters C
I have achieved sub-2:30 times, and think we can still do better. I will try to post a video as soon as I get another chance to test on a high ceiling. I honestly think nationals times could surpass 3 minutes.AznPr0d1gy wrote:If there is a time of 230, theres gotta be some dude breaking the bank to hire a team of engineers. And even then, I'm not sure they can achieve that due to limitations of the rubber itself.
Innovation =/= success
-
- Member
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 1:02 pm
- Division: C
- State: TX
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Helicopters C
I was the one that won Berkeley with a 2 min 28s time. The ceiling was around 5 meters tall. I can definitely see myself breaking 3 minutes once I get things up and running.